Yeah, I'm sucker for Bruce Willis and a future involving robots, so what? Surrogates envisions a not-too-distant future in which the majority of people live their lives through better-looking robot versions of themselves, while the real versions can just sit at home and develop body fat and bad skin. Crime and depression rates have dropped radically, as now most people are able to fulfill their desires without risk. Willis plays Detective Tom Greer, who has become less fond of living vicariously, fearing the distance separating him and his wife Maggie (Rosamund Pike) is too great to overcome (she hasn't left her room in real form for months).
When two people die mysteriously after their surrogates are seemingly electrocuted from the inside, Greer and his partner Peters (Radha Mitchell) investigate how they're connected, and who might have the desire and the technology to kill people through their surrogates. Their investigation includes visits to a "Dread" camp, full of humans who reject the impersonal life of surrogates and led by The Prophet (Ving Rhames), and the creator of surrogates, Canter (James Cromwell), who was kicked out of his own company decades ago and whose son was one of the recent murder victims.
This movie is full of really good car chases and action scenes, set within some loose framework of a story and peppered with lots of good-looking robots. For once that weird plastic CG de-aging thing that X2 did can work really well: everyone is supposed to look a little creepy and fake (although Willis just looks silly with that weird wig). The acting is over the top and the plot doesn't make a lot of sense, giving Surrogates an unintentional B-movie feel. Like, not an exceptionally good B-movie. Also, in the future there's not much diversity.
It's fun to watch for the most part but lacking in any development or substance (though it tries); it's frustrating that an interesting and fairly believable premise is given very little expansion. I wanted to know how general culture was affected, how homeless people were living, why the Dreads seemed to forgo any machinery at all, etc. I understand that it's an action movie and not meant to be a treatise on the strength of human connections in a world inhabited by people-controlled robots. However, when any movie is placed in a setting not fully realized or developed, it's confusing and less engaging, plus there were attempts to inject those sorts of lofty ideas that didn't really fit. I don't regret watching it, but I definitely could have lived without it. It was cool to see various big-deal action scenes taking place in Boston, though (that's sort of where I currently live).
3/5
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Surrogates (2009)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sort of where you currently live? ;) Are you a surrogate as well, or does your surrogate live there?
ReplyDeleteYeah, it seemed a bit half-assed, like it was a big-budget movie filmed on a smaller budget, with lots of questions left unanswered and/or smaller details unaddressed.
Willis maybe needs to get in touch with Sean Connery's former wigmaster. He somehow always pulled off his wigs.
I feel the same way. The plot seemed shallow and the characters and basic concept were both underdeveloped. I later discovered that "Surrogates" was based on a set of graphic novels and it made a bit more sense. Not that graphic novels are inherently shallow or underdeveloped, but they are not fully fleshed out screenplays. To turn a graphic novel into a movie takes a lot of adaptation and I just don't think there was enough done. The chase scenes seemed a bit padded as well. They were good, but maybe too long, in an effort to compensate.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't a bad flick, though, it just failed to live up to its potential.
Any wonder why B-movies these days seem to be receiving multimillion dollar production budgets? Whatever happened to the good old days of Ed Wood budgets?
ReplyDelete